I will never forget a line that Peter Roebuck wrote in a cricket match report. It was wildly over-the-top and heavy-handed, and it symbolised what made his writing so very unique and special, but also, why he turned others off.

Hats off to a unique talent

The line set the scene for a match report on a typically grey day of Ashes play in England in 2001 and went as follows: “Neither chill winds nor dark clouds that came like Heathcliff’s scowl over proceedings could quite drain the opening day of its tension or occasion.”

Most writers would have been content to write “grey” or “drizzly”. Not Roebuck. For him, only a reference to the chief character of Emily Bronte’s 1847 novel Wuthering Heights would suffice.

It’s a fine line between beautiful, crafted prose that elevates sport to an artform, and flowery, tryhard lines that scream “Look at me! I’m a writer!” Peter Roebuck, as all but his most loyal readers would agree, was capable of both. But even when he was a little obtuse, or even extremely obtuse, he was always a great read.

Roebuck, who took his own life in South Africa yesterday, was a former topline English county player who never represented his country, despite being widely regarded as having the talent to do so. After his playing career, he set up shop both in Australia and South Africa, and was as active as coach and mentor to underprivileged African cricketers as he was in the media.

But this is not a piece about the man, whom I knew only to nod and say hello to in the press box, or his deeds. It is a salute to a gifted, if flawed, cricket writer.

Let it be said, as clearly as possible, that original voices are required in the sports media just as they are in the arts or any other field of life. That’s why Roebuck’s ABC radio colleague Kerry O’Keefe does so well. Kerry sounds like Kerry and no one else, just like Bill Lawry sounds only like Bill Lawry and Richie Benaud sounds like no one who has come before or will ever come again.

Even the grating Tony Greig has the saving grace of sounding only like Tony Greig. At least when Tony’s on the box, you know it’s Tony. Today’s commentary boxes, not to mention newspaper columns, are increasingly full of drones who regurgitate the same old tired phrases that fill us with despair when they come from media-trained sportsmen. How can we bag them when we’re doing it ourselves?

Roebuck never did that. To sit down to a Roebuck column with a strong cup of coffee was a delight. You knew, beyond doubt, that the column would be full of phrases and references you just wouldn’t get anywhere else. Some of those phrases would grate. Others would make you want to whoop with delight.

In today’s Sydney Morning Herald, they’ve plucked a gem of a Roebuckian description of Allan Border: “A glint eyed toughie, black hat and stubbled chin, the fellow who plays poker and spits in the spittoon.”

On his day, Roebuck could really nail it. Character assessment was his strength. Indeed, his greatest character assessment was not of any particular individual but of the whole Australian psyche. In short, he got what made us tough. He understood that this is a country where the strong survive, where talent is far more important more than the colour of your old school tie. He genuinely loved Australia for this.

He was also a technical analyst without peer, a fact which was often obscured by his own purple prose. In his very last column, he spoke about struggling young opening batsman Phillip Hughes being “open chested on the back foot”. The whole of Australia could tell his faulty technique was causing him to get too many nicks. Roebuck explained exactly why, as he had done countless times.

Roebuck wasn’t one to get close to players. Indeed, he wasn’t one to get close to many people at all, and would often vanish halfway through functions. His distance from players occasionally worked against him. He wrote reams of praise about Stuart MacGill’s principled stance against touring Zimbabwe, despite the fact he never once contacted MacGill to talk about it. This irked MacGill.

But mostly, his distance was a strength. There’s a great tale about a touring Fairfax cricket journo who was once afraid to write a yarn about a Ricky Ponting tantrum overseas, as he quite rightly believed Ponting would not speak to him again. (In the end, the Herald’s foreign correspondent offered to write the yarn.)

Roebuck never had this problem. He always wrote what was on his mind. And so, in 2008, he penned the front page SMH column that in many ways will always define him. After Australia’s last minute win in the acrimonious Test against India at the SCG, Roebuck took offence at Australia’s in-your-face celebrations, calling for Ponting’s sacking as captain.

Three years down the track, it now seems like a ridiculously harsh call. Roebuck himself once suggested he may have gone too far. But tensions were high at the time and Roebuck went with his gut. Whether he was right or wrong hardly matters. The point is, no one else had the courage to make such a bold call.

There is a book which never leaves my bedside table. It is Elmore Leonard’s 10 Rules of Writing. Leonard, the brilliantly sparse writer of crime and western novels, names as his first rule: “never open a book with weather”.

Even when he wasn’t writing about dark clouds like Heathcliff’s scowl, Roebuck habitually broke just about every rule in the book. Leonard also wrote about the pitfalls of commencing lines with adverbs like “suddenly”. Robeuck was the master of that. His stories were always “happily this” and “fortuitously that”.

But when all is done, Roebuck followed his own writing rules, not someone else’s. He was a fan of cricketers like Shane Warne who played the game their own distinctive way, and Peter Roebuck undeniably played the journalism game his own way. Whether you liked his stuff or not, you had to admire it.

In many ways, you had to admire the man too, who we can now see was as passionate yet tortured as Emily Bronte’s fictional character Heathcliff.

Though we should also reserve judgement to some extent, pending the police investigation into Roebuck’s death, which South African authorities say will take a month.

In 2001, Roebuck received a suspended jail sentence for common assault, after he physically punished three young South African cricketers he was coaching. Though he pleaded guilty and was deeply contrite, a broader review of the man’s character does not seem entirely inappropriate.

39 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • GB says:

      11:45am | 14/11/11

      Didn’t like him at all. Respected his knowledge of the game but that’s about it. I won’t talk about all the other stuff as you won’t publish it.

    • CJ says:

      11:46am | 14/11/11

      “There is a book which never leaves my bedside table. It is Elmore Leonard’s 10 Rules of Writing.”

      - You gonna read it one day?

    • Seth Brundle says:

      02:22pm | 15/11/11

      I believe the use of the phrase “pwned” is appropriate here ?

    • iansand says:

      12:14pm | 14/11/11

      Roebuck wrote to let you know how clever he was, not to inform or enlighten.

    • Will says:

      12:27pm | 14/11/11

      Clearly, Roebuck was a complex man who may have held many secrets - some of which may have been quite dark. Needless to say, I’m not comfortable putting his work on such a high pedestal for various reasons. Not least, I think the idea that Roebuck was ‘without peer’ is absurd. Haigh, Atherton and Coward are 3 writers who I think offered more than Roebuck.

      He was a cricket writer, nothing more, nothing less. The circumstances of his demise are very sad.

    • Gaz says:

      12:33pm | 14/11/11

      you lost credibility by the 5th paragraph

    • Anthony says:

      12:33pm | 14/11/11

      If one thing screams inner conflict and unease with the world it is writing for The Age on a frequent basis.

    • SM says:

      12:45pm | 14/11/11

      wow, that’s a tremendous contribution

    • SM says:

      12:34pm | 14/11/11

      Sadly I was reading his column in the Herald yesterday at home at the very moment a news update came on TV saying he had died.  He was a tremendous writer, and the circumstances around his death that have been released thus far are very upsetting.

      I’m sad, but I don’t know what to think

    • Reg says:

      12:38pm | 14/11/11

      “Roebuck was a complex man who may have held many secrets - some of which may have been quite dark.”

      That’s probably about as glowing as you can get about the guy. Afterlife was obviously more appealing than jail.

    • CJ says:

      01:18pm | 14/11/11

      A famous journalist - on tour with the Australian Cricket Team, no less - commits suicide by leaping from the 6th storey of a Cape Town hotel while cops are in his room. And you wanna talk about about Heathcliff and pretty prose? Why the kid gloves?

    • Anna C says:

      01:51pm | 14/11/11

      Because they have different rules when it comes their fellow journos.

      We are obviously not allowed to speak ill of the dead. What happened to my previous comments? Why haven’t they been posted? What’s happened to free speech in this country?

    • Tanya says:

      03:00pm | 14/11/11

      @ CJ: It’s not a report on the events surrounding Mr Roebuck’s death. It’s basically an acknowledgement of his passing and salute to his professional life by a member of the same profession!

      Anna C: He wasn’t Robert Mugabe - why would anybody want to speak ill of him, particularly when none of the facts are known? Its not a question of freedom of speech -  its about professionalism and basic human respect for this man’s family!

    • Greg says:

      12:09am | 16/11/11

      I wonder if a non-journalist would be treated the same way, if the same allegations were made prior to a suicide?

      Just imagine if the same circumstances applied to a Catholic priest, for instance.

      And yet still journalists remain totally clueless about why they are consistently held in such low public esteem.

      Well here is another classic example.

    • Steve S says:

      01:30pm | 14/11/11

      Roebuck’s constant pandering to fundamentalist Indian fans destroyed any credibility his articles held with me. That fact the he was then so happy to regularly sink the boots into Australia in the name of neutral reporting made the hypocricy of his work even more cringe worthy. The concept that he didn’t care about being popular is nothing more than propaganda, Roebuck wouldn’t dare write anything critical unless he believed the target audience would tolerate it.

    • Paul says:

      03:34pm | 14/11/11

      Here Here. Peters death is tragic and very sad but you have hit the nail on the head.
      His columns became regular anti Australian drivel. If there was a chance to rip into the Aussie cricket team by George he took it
      His ripping into Ponting and demamded sacking was insulting through his guise as an ozzy writer. South Africans, Indian writer all stick together, however Peter took great joy in goading the Australian public.

    • Don says:

      03:36pm | 14/11/11

      Bang on the money there. That call for Ponting to be sacked was a blatant play for the Indian market. He was cunning that is for sure, we will see how that plays out over the next few months when the allegations come to light. Notice how you don’t hear much (or anything) from his former high profile team mates. Nothing from Viv, Botham or Garner as yet - they were too high class for him that is for sure and he hated them for it.

    • Esteban says:

      05:09pm | 14/11/11

      He got it badly wrong in Sydney that day and encouraged the excessive indian reaction to the Australian win that day.

      The Indian threat to go home unless the umpire was changed would have been much less likely without Roebucks influence and what was effectively an endorsement.

      The poor treatment of A Symonds and the fact that Australian players now have to walk on egg shells when playing India are all unfortunate results of Roebuck’s misjudgement that day.

      A year or 2 ago he was pontificating on the radio about Ponting and stated something like “It is OK to make mistakes but not OK if you don’t learn from them”

      OK fair enough but Roebuck made a big mistake in that Sydney test and never fessed up or apologised or even acknowledged the resultant damage was to some degree attributable to his comments.

      I still enjoyed his objective critique of the game but lost faith in his subjective assessments from that day when an apology to Ponting and the Australian team was not forthcoming.

      Having said that I am saddened about the circumstances of his death.

    • Tim says:

      09:37pm | 14/11/11

      Spot on. I tired of his articles that day. And I am still concerned about the treatment of Andrew Symonds. Looks like he was obnoxious and drank too much. But did he deserve his career to be ended by the Indians?

    • Tom says:

      01:06pm | 15/11/11

      That’s right, Tim, the nasty old Indians ended Symond’s career. Poor form, lack of team discipline, alcohol issues and the alienation of even his staunchest former supporters such as Clarke had nothing to do with his professional demise - it was all the Indians’ doing. Honestly, what planet are you people from?

    • Eric says:

      03:11pm | 14/11/11

      He was, apparently, politically correct.

      There is no higher praise than that, nor can any character flaws detract from it.

      Rest in peace.

    • Stockinbingal roo says:

      03:14pm | 14/11/11

      What a rotton group of mongrels you lot are.

    • Tanya says:

      03:54pm | 14/11/11

      Wild, isn’t it? It’s a worry.

    • Dan says:

      05:25pm | 14/11/11

      What a valueless contribution. One wonders why you bothered.

    • Rich Pay says:

      03:34pm | 14/11/11

      Few people would be privy to the exact reasons Peter Roebuck thrust himself from a hotel balcony while preparing to cover Australia’s second cricket test in South Africa.
      With that in mind and considering the bizarre lead up events to his untimely suicide, the early stories covering his sudden demise have up until this point, mainly focused on Roebuck the writer.
      In the past few hours Roebuck has been lauded like few others who have made the pen/keyboard their work tool of choice.
      Described by peers as the Tendulkar of journalistic circles Roebuck has been widely praised for his fearless opinion pieces, his in depth knowledge of the game and in a somewhat overt display of hyperbole even had his work compared to that of Shakespeare.
      At his best Roebuck was without doubt an insightful, colourful and extremely talented cricketing journalist.
      His articles could be engaging, thought provoking and crafted with a wit and scything sense of timing that few could match.
      His most famous article, printed in the Sydney Morning Herald the day after Australia beat India in the controversial 2006 test match called for the head of Ricky Ponting after what Roebuck described as arrogant and abrasive conduct from the Australian team.
      Relishing his self appointed role as cricket’s moral compass, Roebuck strongly criticized the behaviour of Mathew Hayden, Adam Gilchrist and Michael Clarke after one of the most infamous test matched in modern history.
      While taking the long handle to the Australian team in the same article Roebuck bizarrely labeled renowned racist Harbhajan Singh, from whom the majority of the games issues arose, a Sikh warrior.
      Taking the high ground on this, and many other issues involving members of the Australian team over the years, Roebuck has left himself open in a huge way.
      While we can only pontificate as to the recent happenings in South Africa, it is confirmed fact that Roebuck was previously arrested and convicted for assaulting three young men put in his care.
      This alone is perverse and worrying behavior and not the sort of activities a gentleman obsessed with the judgment and chiding of an excitable bunch of cricketers should be convicted of.
      Over appealing, sledging and accusations of ‘sore winning’ are one thing but when put in comparison to bizarre assaults, double lives and the sort of innuendo floating around at the moment, they obviously don’t compare.
      Considering his increasingly judgmental scrawlings and ramblings, was it not hypocritical for the ABC and Fairfax to be employing this man?’
      While the debate about sportsman as role models will rage on for eons, it might be timely to consider whether sporting journalists, the men who can help decide a man’s cricketing future, be kept to the standards they inadvertently have set themselves?
      When a writer passes away, they are said to be lucky in the fact that their articles, opinions and etchings will live on forever, creating an irreplaceable legacy for future generations to explore.

    • Steve Putnam says:

      07:22pm | 14/11/11

      I’m not here to defend Roebuck but India got robbed blind in that test match. They decided that they weren’t going to be polite little bunny rabbits anymore and who could blame them?
      Irrespective of what Roebuck had to say they were incensed and incredulous that the sledging champs couldn’t cop some of their own medicine. Some of the things Australian teams have said in their attempts at mental disintegration can’t be repeated here and this has been going on for forty odd years.
      Speaking for myself, I wouldn’t be too put out by by being called a monkey - I got called lots worse things during my time at the crease - but if a keeper or a slipper made any reference to my woman then they’d be needing emergency surgery to have a Grey-Nicholls removed from their anus.

    • Rusty says:

      10:37am | 15/11/11

      Steve, India were never polite little bunnies. You obviously believe their own hype but a quick look at their ICC abuse record, even before that famous match, should clear any fantasies you may have about their spotlessness. Since they had the most black marks against them for umpire intimation, ball-tampering, etc than any other team, including Australia which only came in third. The infamous Sikh alone had a nasty record of racial abuse and intimidation which Roebuck would’ve known, but chose to ignore in his haste to be seen to side with the supposed underdogs and increasingly powerful indian cohort. Yes, Roebuck had a strong sense of justice but it was often clouded by his own self-righteousness.

      Roebuck wrote frequently for Indian newspapers and, in the articles I read, was always quite partial to them, and displayed none of the objectivity many writers are now attributing to him.

      I usually read him and admired his often astuteness but didn’t like him much for this arrogance he frequently displayed when publicly passing judgement on others. And in the end, he couldn’t face others passing judgement on him. In the end he was as flawed as anyone, including Ricky Ponting & Andrew Symonds, whose careers he sought to end. Perhaps more so.

    • Dave says:

      03:37pm | 14/11/11

      “He understood that this is a country where the strong survive, where talent is far more important more than the colour of your old school tie.”
      So, basically, what youre saying is that he didnt know anything about the real Australia, then. Because thats as inaccurate a description of this country as I have ever heard.

    • john says:

      04:18pm | 14/11/11

      @Dave “Because thats as inaccurate a description of this country as I have ever heard.” - perhaps more accurately,  ruthlessness, selfishness,greed, arrogance that leads to premature death from depression & despair would be more accurate description about what this country is all about. Citizens treat each other poorly and unfairly in this god forsaken country - especially when there is a buck in it - its exacerbated.

    • Matt says:

      04:34pm | 14/11/11

      A gifted writer whose best work was behind him. His more recent stuff was grossly overwritten.His best writing was in the days when he wrote his copy in longhand once and dictated it to the copytaker. Roebuck’s real talent was in the ABC commentary box, especially as O’Keeffe’s straight man. He was erudite, pithy and succinct on radio - overly florid on paper.

      The cricket media and the wider cricket community will need to look at themselves quite critically in the next few weeks as the details of what is likely to be a sordid story emerge. What did the cricket community know or suspect about Roebuck and what did they do about it?

    • Tim says:

      09:18pm | 14/11/11

      Agree with you Matt - I disliked his articles as he was (they were) the personification of pompous. But in the commentary box he was entertaining. I agree with some above that we have seen the media fraternity close in around a sexual assault and suicide. Wikipedia reported suicide straight away yet Fairfax took awhile to get the story out there.

    • Greg says:

      07:50pm | 14/11/11

      Something about this makes me recall the saying “at the end of the game, the king and the pawns go back in the same box”. I don’t know enough about Roebuck to pass comment, but if anything, the comments above, though largely critical, have made me more interested in learning his story. The irony is that people are better remembered for following “the path less travelled”, and anyone critical of someone for being overly floral with language has obviously never read a Tom Robbins piece. Sounds as though he died as irreverently as he lived.

    • John Price says:

      09:14pm | 14/11/11

      I remember an terrible phrase he used while writing about the Pakistan team on the 1970’s - “the round-faced contributions of Mushtaq Mohammad” What on earth is a round faced contribution? How does it differ from an oval faced contribution? It was just an adjective for the sake of it.

      The other aspect of his writing that got me down was the lack of facts to support his unusual opinions. It made his columns seems like a reading from the Old Testament.

    • Palone says:

      10:08pm | 14/11/11

      So many experts, and so little expertise. I have read every comment here displayed and nary a one written without flaw. The bloke being torn to pieces here is remembered by me as being one of the finest penman in the business. Yes, cricket was his forte, but I remember a piece he wrote after a friend to all of us was killed in an aircraft accident.  It still sits above my work station, and I have yet to read a more soulfull, sincere, and faithful eulogy.
      He was an arguer, (so am I), he was often abusive, (so am I), and he was imperfect, as I am. But for all of your uninformed “holier than thou” superiority,  and with all of his faults, he could turn a phrase like few others.
      He was an opinionated writer. Aren’t we all?
      R.I.P. Peter.  How I would love to be without fault.

    • Matt says:

      11:01pm | 14/11/11

      I am sorry for your loss. My opinion above is like most others - probably not worth a pinch of the proverbial.

      Peter was a much better writer than most - a better cricket player too for that matter. Just because we can’t all play like Clapton doesn’t mean we can’t form an opinion about musicians.

    • Amanda says:

      10:12am | 15/11/11

      I love what you have written Palone.

      And everyone should lay off. The man is dead. Anthony is writing about Peter’s writing, which he has done.

      and also, to everyone who is saying that journos look after each other, etc Anthony does say “a broader review of the man’s character does not seem entirely inappropriate. ” - did you even finish reading the article, or did you all start composing your harsh assessments before you got to the end?

    • Cynicised says:

      02:54pm | 15/11/11

      Hear hear! I for one will miss Peter’s writing, as well as his radio commentary. The cricketing world has lost a unique and fascinating figure. We are all the poorer for his passing.

      The character assassination can at least wait until he’s cold!!

    • Micko says:

      08:20am | 15/11/11

      I would have thought the media would have the decency to lay-off the hagiography before we know what the pending charges were about.  Another example of the media treating their own more fabourably…

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Malcolm Farr

RT @toplitigator: @farrm51 I think I have found the winner: 'Bladder and Bowel Website'

Malcolm Farr

RT @toplitigator: @farrm51 Very difficult to believe the excitment of 'Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards Scheme' website doesn't have ppl all over it.

Malcolm Farr

RT @toplitigator: @farrm51 As for the 'Intergovernmental Committee on Surveying and Mapping' website, just how do you contain your excitement?

Malcolm Farr

RT @lynlinking: @farrm51 Well the links should be posted on Twitter more, by people that care about the Government. Perhaps the MSM could help cheers lyn

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Reports of Ron Paul’s death are greatly exaggerated

Reports of Ron Paul’s death are greatly exaggerated

Reports of Ron Paul’s political demise have been greatly exaggerated and his tactical genius is…

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not…

Our Budget blade didn’t cut aid, it’s being paid in spades

Our Budget blade didn’t cut aid, it’s being paid in spades

Ten million children vaccinated. 2.5 million people with access to safe drinking water. And 30 million…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: The greatest ending to a football season ever?

Dave B says:

Congratulations & well deserved win! I've been a Utd supporter from 7 years of age, even stuck with them when they went down to the 2nd Div. However, despite the X-town rivalry & even as a devout MU fan, I can say that I truly admired the determination, courage & skill shown by the Blues - What a spectacle,… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Real women like men who drink beer

Real women like men who drink beer

British comedian John Cleese calls them “beer fairies”.  It’s a euphemism for… Read more

198 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter